Talk:Burst transmission

Overall quality
Let's be honest here: This is a lower-end article for the Telecommunications project.

It needs an overhaul. Let's go through this paragraph by paragraph:


 * The initial definition isn't correct (the transmission power says nothing about burstiness. Anyway, what would "relative high power" even mean? Relative to what?)
 * "Can be intentional..." redundant to the first paragraph, more unfounded claims (it's still a burst if the data rate is low.)
 * The "Data Burst" / "Info Burst" TV thing is something that should be on a separate page, maybe behind a disambiguation page.
 * "..can occur naturally": this might be the paragraph worth salvaging


 * "See also: Spread Spectrum" Um, no, that is more or less unrelated here.
 * "This article incorporates public domain material from the General Services Administration document: "Federal Standard 1037C". (in support of MIL-STD-188)": it does not contain the "burst" definition from there (which would be sensible to adapt, but wasn't done). Instead, it uses an obsolete hand-wavy definition that might well be from the manual of some 1970's field radio rather than a sensible general statement.

Categories:


 * Automatic identification and data capture: Um, why?
 * Radio-frequency identification: Completely unrelated?
 * Telecommunications stubs: Fully agree

I honestly don't know what I'd do with this article. I'm leaning towards deleting all the content and replacing it with with the definition of "burst" from MIL-STD-188:

A burst, in data communications, a sequence of signals, noise, or interference counted as a unit in accordance with some specific criterion or measure.

Stating "a burst transmission is the transmission of a burst" doesn't really qualify as encyclopedic content, so maybe we should just start a better "Burst" article and delete this one?